Cover not available
Article published In:
Into adpositions: New formal perspectives on the structure of the PP and its variation
Edited by Víctor Acedo-Matellán, Theresa Biberauer, Jaume Mateu and Anna Pineda
[Linguistic Variation 21:1] 2021
► pp. 135–173

Locative Ps as general relators

Location, direction, DOM in Romance

| Università di Firenze
| Università di Firenze
| Università di Firenze
Based mostly on the Romance languages, we provide evidence for the conclusion that oblique adpositions involved in the encoding of location and direction do not contribute a specific, fixed spatial meaning. On the contrary, they are general relators, relating a complement to an event by establishing an inclusion relation between them. Locatives are specializations of the basic relational inclusion content. State-in, motion-to and motion-from interpretations depend on the interaction of these simple relators with the structure of the event. Specifically, the relator may attach at the level of the Result phrase (goal, motion-to) or at the level of the Cause layer (source, motion-from). Furthermore, the Romance languages provide evidence for differential encoding of non-animate vs. animate location, which we refer to as locative DOM, presenting and discussing various instances of it.
Keywords: Locative, Oblique, Adposition, Passive, Differential Object Marking
Article outline
  • 1.Issues and goals
    • 1.1Basic proposal
    • 1.2Some basic evidence
  • 2.The Italian a ‘at, to’/ da ‘from, by’ system
    • 2.1Italian a ‘at, to’
    • 2.2Italian da ‘from, by’
    • 2.3Italian a as agent/causer
  • 3.Crosslinguistic evidence
  • 4.Locative DOM
    • 4.1Complex adpositions
    • 4.2Simple adpositions and where DOM
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 8 September 2020
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/lv.00035.fra
References (93)
References
Arsenijević, B. 2006. Inner Aspect and Telicity: The Decompositional and the Quantificational Nature of Eventualities at the Syntax-semantics Interface. PhD dissertation, Leiden University.Google Scholar
Baker, M. 1988. 1988. Incorporation: A Theory of Grammatical Function Changing. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Beck, S. & K. Johnson. 2004. Double objects again. Linguistic Inquiry 351. 97–124. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Belletti, A. 2017. Labeling (Romance) causatives. Manuscript. Universities of Geneva & Siena. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bellucci, G. 2017. Oblique Arguments: Theoretical and Experimental Perspectives. PhD Dissertation. University of Florence.Google Scholar
Belvin, R. S. 1996. Inside Events: The Non-Possessive Meanings of Possession Predicates and the Semantic Conceptualization of Events. PhD Thesis, University of Southern California.Google Scholar
Belvin, R., & M. den Dikken. 1997. “ There, happens, to, be, have ”, Lingua 1011. 151–183. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Benveniste, É. 1966. Problèmes de linguistique générale 1. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
Bruening, Benjamin. 2013. By phrases in passives and nominals. Syntax 161. 1–41. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Butt, Miriam & Tafseer Ahmed. 2011. The redevelopment of Indo-Aryan case systems from a lexical semantic perspective. Morphology 211. 545–572. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Caha, P. 2009. The nanosyntax of case. Ph.D. Dissertation. CASTL, Tromsø.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. 1995. The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
2001. Derivation by Phase. In M. Kenstowicz (ed.), Ken Hale: A Life in Language, 1–54. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N., A. Gallego & D. Ott. 2019. Generative grammar and the faculty of language: Insights, questions, and challenges. special issue: 229–261 Catalan Journal of Linguistics. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cinque, G. 2010. Mapping Spatial PPs: an Introduction. In G. Cinque & L. Rizzi (eds.), Mapping Spatial PPs, 3–25. New York: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Collins, C. 2005. A smuggling approach to the passive in English. Syntax 81: 81–120. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Creissels, D. 2006. Encoding the distinction between location, source, and destination. In M. Hickmann & S. Robert (eds.), Space in Languages: Linguistic Systems and Cognitive Categories, 19–28. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Crowley, T. 2004. Bislama Reference Grammar. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dikken, M. den. 1995. Particles: On the syntax of verb-particle, triadic and causative constructions. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
. 1998. Predicate inversion in DP. In A. Alexiadou & C. Wilder (eds.), Possessors, predicates and movement in the determiner phrase, 177–214. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dikken, Marcel den. 2010. On the Functional Structure of Locative and Directional PPs. In G. Cinque & L. Rizzi (eds.), Mapping Spatial PPs, 74–126. New York: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fábregas, A. 2007. (Axial) parts and wholes. Nordlyd 341: 1–32. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2015. Direccionales con con y Marcado Diferencial de Objeto. Revue Romane 501.163–190. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Filip, H. 2003. Prefixes and the delimitation of events. Journal of Slavic Linguistics 111. 55–101.Google Scholar
Fillmore, C. J. 1968. The Case for Case. In E. Bach & R. T. Harms (eds.), Universals in Linguistic Theory, 1–88. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.Google Scholar
Folli, R. 2008. Complex PPs in Italian. In A. Asbury, J. Dotlačil, B. Gehrke, R. Nouwen (eds.), Syntax and Semantics of Spatial P, 197–220. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Folli, R. & G. Ramchand. 2005. Prepositions and results in Italian and English: an analysis from event decomposition. In H. J. Verkuyl, H. de Swart and A. van Hout (eds.), Perspectives on Aspect. Dordrecht: Springer. 81–105. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Franco, L. 2016. Axial Parts, phi-features and degrammaticalization. Transactions of the Philological Society 1141: 149–170. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2018. ‘Oblique’ serial verbs in Pidgin and Creole languages. QULSO 41. 73–108.Google Scholar
Franco, L., & P. Lorusso. 2019. The expression of proper location and beyond: motion-to and state-in in Italian spatial adpositions. In M. Baird and J. Pesetsky. NELS 49: Proceedings of the Forty-Ninth Annual Meeting of the North East Linguistic Society: Volume 1, 279–290 GLSA: University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar
Franco, L., & M. R. Manzini. 2017. Instrumental prepositions and case: Contexts of occurrence and alternations with datives. Glossa 2(1). 1–47. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Freeze, R. 1992. Existentials and other locatives. Language 681. 553–595. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Garzonio, J., & S. Rossi. 2016. Case in Italian Complex PPs. In E. Carrilho, A. Fiéis, M. Lobo & S. Pereira (eds.), Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 10: Selected papers from ‘Going Romance’ 28, Lisbon, 121–138. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gehrke, B. 2008. Ps in Motion: On the Semantics and Syntax of P Elements and Motion Events. Utrecht: LOT.Google Scholar
Gehrke, B. & N. Grillo. 2009. How to become passive. In Explorations of Phase Theory: Features, Arguments, and Interpretation at the Interfaces, ed. Kleanthes K. Grohmann, Interface Explorations, 231–268. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hale, K., & S. J. Keyser. 1993. On argument structure and the lexical expression of grammatical relations. In K. Hale & S. J. Keyser (eds.), The view from building 20, 53–109. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Harley, H. 2002. Possession and the Double Object Construction. Linguistic Variation Yearbook 21: 29–68. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2013. External arguments and the Mirror Principle: On the distinctness of Voice and v. Lingua 1251: 34–57. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Higginbotham, J. 2009. Tense, Aspect, and Indexicality. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hoekstra, T. 1999. Auxiliary selection in Dutch. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 171: 67–84. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jackendoff, R. 1996. The architecture of the linguistic-spatial interface. In P. Bloom, M. A. Peterson, L. Nadel, & M. F. Garrett (eds.), Language and Space, 1–30. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Johns, Alana. 1992. Deriving ergativity. Linguistic Inquiry 231: 57–87.Google Scholar
Kayne, R. 1975. French Syntax. Cambridge, Ma: MIT Press.Google Scholar
1984. Connectedness and binary branching. Dordrecht: Foris. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1994. The Antisimmetry of syntax. Cambridge, Ma: MIT Press.Google Scholar
2010. Comparisons and contrasts. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Keenan, E. L. 1985. Passive in the world’s languages. In T. Shopen, (ed.), Language typology and syntactic description, Vol. 1, Clause structure, 243–281. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Koopman, H. 2000. Prepositions, Postpositions, Circumpositions, and Particles: The Structure of Dutch PPs. In H. Koopman (ed.), The Syntax of Specifiers and Heads, 204–260. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ledgeway, Adam. 2018. The Causative Construction in the Dialects of Southern Italy and the Phonology Syntax Interface. In L. Franco, & P. Lorusso (eds.), Linguistic Variation: Structure and Interpretation. In honor of Rita Manzini. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Legate, J. A. 2014. Voice and v: Lessons from Acehnese. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levinson, L. 2011. Possessive with in Germanic: Have and the role of P. Syntax 141: 355–393. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Longobardi, G. 2001. Formal syntax, diachronic minimalism, and etymology: The history of French chez . Linguistic Inquiry 321: 275–302. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Luraghi, S. 2011. Human landmarks in spatial expressions: from Latin to Romance. In S. Kittilä, K. Västi and J. Ylikoski (eds.), Case, Animacy, and Semantic Roles, 209–234. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Manzini, M. R. 2017. Passive, smuggling and the by-phrase. In N. LaCara, Keir Moulton & A.-M. Tessier (eds.), A Schrift to Fest Kyle Johnson, 233–244. University of Massachusets – Amherst.Google Scholar
Manzini, M. R., & L. Franco. 2016. Goal and DOM datives. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 341: 197–240. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Manzini, M. R., & L. M. Savoia. 2005. I dialetti italiani e romanci. Morfosintassi generativa (31 volumes) Alessandria: Edizioni dell’Orso.Google Scholar
. 2007. A Unification of Morphology and Syntax. Routledge: London. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2011a. Grammatical Categories. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2011b. Reducing ‘case’ to denotational primitives: Nominal inflections in Albanian. Linguistic Variation 111: 76–120. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Manzini, M. R., L. M. Savoia, & L. Franco. 2015. Ergative case, Aspect and Person splits: Two case studies. Acta Linguistica Hungarica 621. 297–351. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2020. DOM and Dative in Italo-Romance. In A. Bárány & L. Kalin (eds.), Case, agreement, and their interactions: New perspectives on Differential Object Marking. 219–268. (pages for Manzini, Savoia and Franco 2020) Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Matushansky, O. 2016. The definite article in proper places. Paper presented at Workshop on the semantic contribution of Det and Num. (In)definiteness, genericity and referentiality, UAB, May 27–28, 2016.
Michaelis, S. M., Maurer, P., Haspelmath, M. & M. Huber (eds.) 2013. Atlas of Pidgin and Creole Language Structures Online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. [URL]
Myler, N. 2013. On coming the pub in the North West of England: accusative unaccusatives, dependent case, and preposition incorporation. Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 161:189–207. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2016. Building and interpreting possession sentences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nam, S. 1995. The Semantics of Locative Prepositional Phrases in English. PhD dissertation, UCLA.Google Scholar
2005. Directional locatives in event structure: asymmetry between goal and source. Eoneohag (Journal of the Linguistic Society of Korea) 431: 85–117.Google Scholar
Palancar, E. 2001. The Origin of Agent Markers. Berlin: Akademie. (Studia Typologica 5). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pantcheva, M. 2010. The syntactic structure of Locations, Goals, and Sources. Linguistics 481: 1043–1081. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2011. Decomposing Path: The Nanosyntax of Directional Expressions. PhD dissertation, University of Tromsø.Google Scholar
Pesetsky, D. 1995. Zero syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Pineda, A. 2014. (In)transitivity borders. A study of applicatives in Romance language es and Basque. PhD Dissertation, UAB.Google Scholar
Ramchand, G. 2008. Verb Meaning and the Lexicon: A First Phase Syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Real Puigdollers, C. 2010. A microparametric approach on goal of motion constructions: properties of adpositional systems in Romance and Germanic. Catalan Journal of Linguistics 91: 125–150. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Reinhart, T. 2003. The theta-system – an overview. Theoretical Linguistics 281. 229–290. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Renzi, L. & Salvi, G. 1988. Grande Grammatical Italiana di Consultazione, Volume II. Bologna: Il Mulino.Google Scholar
Rizzi, L. 1988. Il sintagma preposizionale. In L. Renzi, G. P. Salvi, & A. Cardinaletti (eds.), Grande grammatica italiana di consultazione, 507–531. Bologna: Il Mulino.Google Scholar
Rohlfs, G. 1969 [1954]. Grammatica storica della lingua italiana e dei suoi dialetti. Sintassi e formazione delle parole. Torino: Einaudi.Google Scholar
Rothstein, S. 2004. Structuring Events: A Study in the Semantics of Lexical Aspect. Oxford: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rouveret, A. & Vergnaud, J-R. 1980. Specifying Reference to the Subject: French Causatives and Conditions on Representations. Linguistic Inquiry 111. 97–202.Google Scholar
Saeed, S. T. 2016. Space and Events. Newcastle Upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
Starke, M. 2017. Resolving (DAT = ACC) ̸= GEN. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Svenonius, P. 2006. The emergence of axial parts. Nordlyd 331: 1–22.Google Scholar
2010. Spatial P in English. In Guglielmo Cinque and Luigi Rizzi eds., Mapping Spatial PPs, vol. 6 of The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, 127–60. New York: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Talmy, Leonard. 2000. Toward a cognitive semantics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Torrego, E. 2009. Variability in the Case Patterns of Causative Formation in Romance and Its Implications. Linguistic Inquiry 411: 445–470. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tortora, C. 2005. The Preposition’s Preposition in Italian: Evidence for Boundedness of Space. In R. Gess, & E. Rubin (eds), Theoretical and Experimental Approaches to Romance Linguistics, 307–327. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Riemsdijk, H. 1990. Functional prepositions. In H. Pinkster & I. Genee (eds.), Unity in diversity, 229–241. Dordrecht: Foris. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wälchli, B. & F. Zúñiga. 2006. Source-Goal (in)difference and the typology of motion events in the clause. Sprachtypologie & Universalienforschung 591: 284–303.Google Scholar
Wunderlich, Dieter. 1991. How do prepositional phrases fit into compositional syntax and semantics? Linguistics 291: 591–621. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zribi-Hertz, A. & Jean-Louis, L. 2018. General Locative Marking in Martinican Creole (Matinitjè): A case study in grammatical economy. QULSO 41.Google Scholar
Zubizarreta, M. L. & E. Oh. 2007. On the Syntactic Composition of Manner and Motion. Cambridge, Ma: MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zwarts, J. 1997. Vectors as Relative Positions: A compositional semantics of modified PPs. Journal of Semantics 141: 57–86. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (10)

Cited by ten other publications

Ursini, Francesco-Alessio & Tong Wu
2024. On Italian spatial prepositions and measure phrases: reconciling the data with theoretical accounts. Linguistics 62:2 ► pp. 491 ff. DOI logo
Savoia, Leonardo Maria & Benedetta Baldi
2023. Phenomena of Contact and Mixing in the Arbëresh Dialects of San Marzano di San Giuseppe in Salento and Vena di Maida in Calabria. Languages 8:1 ► pp. 87 ff. DOI logo
Savoia, Leonardo Maria & Benedetta Baldi
2024. Explorations in Aromanian Morpho-Syntax: NPs, Prepositional Contexts and Infinitives. Languages 9:2 ► pp. 46 ff. DOI logo
Baldi, Benedetta & Leonardo M. Savoia
2022. Phenomena in Romance verb paradigms: Syncretism, order of inflectional morphemes and thematic vowel. Linguistics Beyond and Within (LingBaW) 8 ► pp. 5 ff. DOI logo
Baldi, Benedetta & Leonardo M. Savoia
2022. Partitives and Indefinites: Phenomena in Italian Varieties. Studia Linguistica 76:1 ► pp. 56 ff. DOI logo
Franco, Ludovico & Paolo Lorusso
2022. Derivational Relators in Italian. Languages 7:2 ► pp. 130 ff. DOI logo
Manzini, Maria Rita & Paolo Lorusso
2022. Chapter 3. A bisentential syntax for a/bare finite complements in South Italian varieties. In Pseudo-Coordination and Multiple Agreement Constructions [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today, 274], ► pp. 66 ff. DOI logo
Baldi, Benedetta & Leonardo Maria Savoia
2021. Possessives, from Franco-Provençal and Occitan Systems to Contact Dialects in Apulia and Calabria. Languages 6:2 ► pp. 63 ff. DOI logo
Quaglia, Stefano
2021. Pattern replication and extraction from spatial PPs in Molise Slavic. Linguistic Variation 21:2 ► pp. 370 ff. DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2024. Elementary Predicates and Related Categories [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today, 285], DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 19 september 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.